-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
?
- Thread starter Idog
- Start date
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I don't believe we have very many scientologists who are active members here.
murdocsvan
Member
Yeah, but that's comparing a book written by several different people over a thousand years ago, to one written by a single man 40 or 50 years ago.
*** Mod Post ***
Please remember that this thread is in the Scientology DIR Forum.
Thanks,
9-10ths_Penguin
Mod
Please remember that this thread is in the Scientology DIR Forum.
Thanks,
9-10ths_Penguin
Mod
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Dude, you're off to a bad start. This specific section isn't for debating scientology, hence the mods warning in the post right above yours. You'll have to take you criticisms to the "Religious Debates" section.
'The Xenu Story' is apparently part of what is called OT III (3), I've not done this level myself so I can't say for sure if it really is even part of Scientology.
What I will say is that the people I know who have done OT III have had some amazing results with it.
From what I've read of the xenu story on the internet, I think it boils down to personal view as to how you regard the story. Just like some Christians take the Bible very literally, some take it as fictional stories to help them in life and some just pick and choose, so it is with this story, if your friend wants to take it literally, as an analogy or just read it and forget about it - what does it matter.
If it turns out that it really is part of Scientology and OTIII, i think i would agree with your friend and see it as an analogy.
What I will say is that the people I know who have done OT III have had some amazing results with it.
From what I've read of the xenu story on the internet, I think it boils down to personal view as to how you regard the story. Just like some Christians take the Bible very literally, some take it as fictional stories to help them in life and some just pick and choose, so it is with this story, if your friend wants to take it literally, as an analogy or just read it and forget about it - what does it matter.
If it turns out that it really is part of Scientology and OTIII, i think i would agree with your friend and see it as an analogy.
themadhair
Well-Known Member
The FreeZoners who have done the equivalent of OT3 who talk about take it is literal data. The ex's I've talked to who have done it talk about it as literal data. Just saying.
I suppose with any religion you have those who are more inclined to take a fundamentalist approach to their beliefs, certain freezone groups (in my opinion) have gone right off the rails, like those who follow Bill Robertsons version of Scientology who take the whole Xenu thing etc very very seriously ... but each to their own haha.
... but each to their own haha.themadhair
Well-Known Member
The argument to metaphor doesn’t make sense given the progression of Hubbard’s ideas. The whole track isn’t just a concept but an actual thing that really exists to record the memories and experiences of its associated thetan. Scientology is pretty much dedicated and designed to handle the data contained on the whole track.
When Hubbard refers to R6, to choose an example, he is very clearly refering to data that exists and needs to be properly handled in order for a thetan to spiritually progress up the bridge. How do you precisely handle that which is metaphor? How do you handle metaphor that has detailed instructions predicated upon it not being metaphor?
Not really wanting to get another DIR infraction here, nor do I want to screw up your gradient, but the entire practice of auditing is designed to handle real problems, real implants and real charges – if the source of these is metaphor then you’ve got a serious hole in your theology.
And for note – it isn’t just a few ex’s or FreeZoners that fundamentalist. I’ve never heard an ex or FreeZoner of that level ever refer to it as anything other than literal data.
When Hubbard refers to R6, to choose an example, he is very clearly refering to data that exists and needs to be properly handled in order for a thetan to spiritually progress up the bridge. How do you precisely handle that which is metaphor? How do you handle metaphor that has detailed instructions predicated upon it not being metaphor?
Not really wanting to get another DIR infraction here, nor do I want to screw up your gradient, but the entire practice of auditing is designed to handle real problems, real implants and real charges – if the source of these is metaphor then you’ve got a serious hole in your theology.
And for note – it isn’t just a few ex’s or FreeZoners that fundamentalist. I’ve never heard an ex or FreeZoner of that level ever refer to it as anything other than literal data.
Last edited:
I appreciate where youre coming from, but Hubbard's ideas are just that... Hubbard's ideas. As the Buddha said "what is true, is what you yourself have observed to be true", sure you'll find people in the church who would gladly swallow anything and everything Ron had to say, if he told them that jumping off a cliff would clear them, they'd probably do it, however Ron himself even said "Scientology comes mostly from my research, but sometimes some of my opinions come into it too, you can do away with those parts" (im just paraphrasing)
While the whole track might be an actual thing, it may not be exactly as LRH describes it. The processes of Scientology auditing are designed so that they will produce results even if you have no knowledge of the theory. The TR's will produce the EP of the TRs whether you know whats behind them, the auditing commands of the Grades will produce the EP of the grades even if you had never read a thing about Scientology.
So i guess what im trying to say is that the Tech will produce results and case gain even if the theory behind them is wrong or off, and in that sense it doesnt matter then how you look at the theory side, whether through metaphor or taking it literally.
As you may have guessed im not one to take everything LRH said without a pinch of salt, i think he was a great guy but like he said, sometime you gotta separate fact from fiction.
(i also re-read my last post and however harsh it sounded i wasn't trying to suggest that all freezoners were fundamentalists haha)
While the whole track might be an actual thing, it may not be exactly as LRH describes it. The processes of Scientology auditing are designed so that they will produce results even if you have no knowledge of the theory. The TR's will produce the EP of the TRs whether you know whats behind them, the auditing commands of the Grades will produce the EP of the grades even if you had never read a thing about Scientology.
So i guess what im trying to say is that the Tech will produce results and case gain even if the theory behind them is wrong or off, and in that sense it doesnt matter then how you look at the theory side, whether through metaphor or taking it literally.
As you may have guessed im not one to take everything LRH said without a pinch of salt, i think he was a great guy but like he said, sometime you gotta separate fact from fiction.
(i also re-read my last post and however harsh it sounded i wasn't trying to suggest that all freezoners were fundamentalists haha)